On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:54:52 +0100, Michel Dänzer <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's not what I said. I gave an Acked-by: line on the condition that a > specific minor change was made to the patch. I've seen this done a > couple of times for the Linux kernel, so it must be good, right? Right, that's a fine approach, what is needed as a follow up is the patch with the changes incorporated *with the Acked-by line included*, which I don't think I've seen. Perhaps we just aren't making it clear that people should feel free to vacuum up Reviewed-by: and Acked-by: lines from mail and insert them into their patches before posting updates. Let's figure out how to make EXA development not suck; aside from that, I'm happy with how the rest of the server is going. -- [email protected]
pgpSiVr2uEGkN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
